The seeds of AMD's troubles had already been planted before the ATI acquisition by squandering human resources on pointless projects and over-leveraging on capital improvements (like the Dresden fab), which were exacerbated twice over by the acquisition. After two companies agree to a merger in principal, there is a lengthy process of due diligence on behalf on the shareholders that an AMD / Nv merger never would have made it through once Nv examined AMD's books. The ATI deal was approved because ATI was, as the article mentions, struggling financially and was bought out at a premium.

It's interesting to think "what if" and get an inside view of personality conflicts, but it just never would have happened.

ATI and AMD make a great couple, both are failing companies that I could careless about other then to create competition for NVIDIA and Intel.

I personally wouldn't/couldn't run a GPU without CUDA and can imagine running a CPU other than Intel

Click to expand...

Wow. Just as others have said...

AMD powers the Wii, will also power the Wii U.
AMD powers the Xbox 360 and its successor.
AMD will power the PS3 successor.
AMD has several 28nm GPUs out in desktop discrete and nvidia is tripping with Kepler still a month and a half away.

If AMD's CPU division just completely dies, the GPU division will split off and stay competitive.

Tegra 3 is fast and sips power in some scenarios but in a (very) limited amount of devices. It isn't selling nearly as well as Snapdragon S3, OMAP 4460 and Exynos 4120 which will all have successors in a small time frame. AMD is moving toward the mobile market, albeit a bit late. Currently they only have x86 low power solutions instead of RISC. (ARM)...

i still like where things have gone, amd is lining up to make so serious cash thanks to its apu and gpu's for the upcoming consoles, big rumors that all three are going to run something of AMD

Click to expand...

my word ,likein this debate

I would have been surprised had AMD Not talked this over on a few occasions

Im with you insane, for the reasons you state but also because within time AMD will have its APU's in Everything

remember, not long ago AMD were touting an optimised approach to game design ,bare metal ,no API style, and with all games made to run on its gpu's primarily that becomes vvvvvvery easy and the whole fanboy debate might be gone if they pull anAMD gpu/ ARM APU from their hat ,seriously if you see the way intel and nvidia are squareing upto this future, it is so going to be, its awaiting the software only and thats being written ,i think

intel are leaning towards business machines instead of personal pcs, yeh they arent going anyware in the home market but importantly they realise for them and their products ,business is where they are going to be earning future revenue unless their gpus start pulling their weight and since they too are trying to further combine the gpu and cpu functionality they might yet do a decent APU

and nvidia are in full flow trying to get APU designs drawn out and minted asap.

they all now know exactly where AMD's going with its APU's and HSA and have realised that in any benchmark an APU that is well specced and designed Will soon be able to destroy a cpu and a gpu in almost every situation and using less power too , they are all trying to get shaders inter mixed with cpus and at many perfornmance and price points, because theirs going to be a lot more competition soon, Arm 64 asissted

AMD/ATI merger wasn't a bad idea at all. The bad news is.... it wasn't executed after the merger very well. Both companies were struggling and it would have been a perfect time to re-image the company as one stronger entity. By taking both sets of technologies and blowing away the competition.
Instead what we got was a poorly advertised economic alternative to the big companies on the block (I.E.Intel and Nvidia)
AMD/ATI still doesn't seem to get that what people want in the technology world is the Greatest, Fastest, and Latest technology. That is the whole definition of the technology world. It doesn't matter what your selling, CPU's, GPU's, Tablets, what ever? Everyone who is into technology wants the latest and greatest.
That doesn't mean that there isn't room for an Economical cheaper alternative to the latest and greatest. It just means that people would rather buy that cheaper alternative from a company that also has the name recognition of also being the best. Which is not what AMD/ATI has.... they just have the reputation of being average and nothing else!
Because of all this Buying Nvidia wouldn't have worked. Nvidia has a CEO who is not satisfied with being average. He wants to be the best!!!

I still hope AMD/ATI can turn it around! It seems the ATI sector of the business still wants too. I think AMD is holding AMD back right now. Just my personal opinion!

I think he was talking about both companies at the time of the acquisition. AMD fail the first generation of Phenom and ATI losing war against Nvidia

Click to expand...

Sorry, but this is a bit false. AMD did announce to buy ATI on summer 2006. nVidia had release their G80 on october/november 2006.

At that moment, ATI maybe less market part, but they had the fastest chip, way better than nVidia. The x1950XT/XTX was much more better than the 7900GTX, and that makes it also for the x1900XT/XTX.

AMD release their first Phenom a year after, like november 2007. Intel had their Core 2 duo on end of summer 2006. So if we do a time line:

AMD released their first DDR2 CPU, Windsor, end of may 2006: x2 5000+
AMD announced to buy ATI, July 2006
Intel released their Core 2 duo on July the 27th
nVidia released their G80 on November the 8th
Early in 2007, ATI was now AMD
May 2007, HD2900XT
6 months later, Phenom 9500/9600.

I don't know where AMD was in a bad situation when they announced to buy ATI before the Intel core architecture, and before the G80, so ATI was a good thing to do, since they have very fast chip, and their chipset for AMD was very very good.

They had already done a lot of thing before the complete transaction on end 2006/Begining 2007. Intel was doing their own chipset and graphics chipset. AMD needed this to continue the battle. They just sit on their ass with the X2 (should have release the AM2 version much more faster, since Intel was already on DDR2.

Well, I still think that Intel has been unfair during the P4 time, and AMD hasn't been fast enought. If the first Phenom was there at the same time of the Core 2 duo or before, it would be maybe different. With Graphics part, they went from really bad vs the G80, and they came with HD3k that wasn't that bad, then 4k where they were taking alot of market share to nVidia.

Anyway, too much talked, I voted no, since AMD and Nvidia didn'T had the same vision of the futur I think. On paper, that would have been good, since AMD had their own Fab, but I am sure the result would be the same as now, and maybe more bad, since nVidia worth more than those 5.4 billions...

IMO, it was Hector Ruiz that was arrogant. AMD+NVIDIA would have gone on to crush ATI and later invest more on CPU R&D to take on Intel. In the end, it didn't end too well for Hector, while Jen-Hsun went on to be CEO of the Year (Forbes), runs a bigger company than AMD, and still good prospects looking into the future.

Click to expand...

When Jen-Hsun does the "come at me bro" gesture he doesn't understand it's a joke. He seriously thinks that's an appropriate reaction for a person to make. I think he still beats Ruiz for raw arrogance.

AMD's purchase of ATI was a great move. I think that to have merged with Nvidia might have caused all kinds of problems for AMD (ie. The two CEOs having a different vision of the future).
But because it didn't happen, it's just pure speculation.

AMD has one VERY major flaw ... they don't market their products worth a poop.
Intel : "Intel Inside" (with a four note jingle everyone is familiar with)
Nvidia : "The way it's meant to be played."
AMD/ATI : " ??? "

I personally have had nothing but bad experiences with ATI and then AMD gpus so i have no faith in AMD graphic cards the cpus cannot perform to what Intel can. Also Because Nvidia had a multi-gpu idea before AMD/ATI Nvidia in my mind is that makes Nvidia superior. Also I have yet to see an AMD mobile processor, by moblie I mean something to either match or overtake Tegra. So Nvidia FTW!!!

And that's exactly what AMD needed (and still needs). Every company needs a pushy CEO, Jen-Hsun is one. Jen-Hsun knows when to be a step back and let hierarchy take over, and when to micro-manage, when to be classy, when to be rural. No wonder he took NV to Forbes Company of the Year. A LOT of people high-up in AMD, when it was doing well with CPUs, got extremely complacent and snobbish. And paid for it. When Core 2 was launched and Barcelona was taking shape, you should have seen the way some of them were acting ("nah, we gon smoke Intel with K10").

Click to expand...

I agree AMD's CEO of that time IMO was not the best man for the job. He really messed up AMD IMO, I think ATI's CEO would have done a much better job. But I hate to say it Jen-Hsun may have messed up Intel with the combination of his aggressiveness to pump out powerfull CPU/GPU combos and give Intel a full head strong fight. A lot more than what AMD is pumping out today. I also believe Jen-Hsun would have rectified Bulldozer way back in the day to ensure it pump out performance the way it was meant to.

I personally have had nothing but bad experiences with ATI and then AMD gpus so i have no faith in AMD graphic cards the cpus cannot perform to what Intel can. Also Because Nvidia had a multi-gpu idea before AMD/ATI Nvidia in my mind is that makes Nvidia superior. Also I have yet to see an AMD mobile processor, by moblie I mean something to either match or overtake Tegra. So Nvidia FTW!!!

Click to expand...

Nvidia didn't have the multi gpu idea first. 3dfx did (VooDoo video cards, if you are wondering). Nvidia bought out 3dfx to get it.

It doesn't matter who does it first, it only matters who does it the best for the consumers buying it.

When Jen-Hsun does the "come at me bro" gesture he doesn't understand it's a joke. He seriously thinks that's an appropriate reaction for a person to make. I think he still beats Ruiz for raw arrogance.

Click to expand...

Seems to at least be somewhat earned arrogance. Nvidia is doing extremely well for themselves.

Quote:
Originally Posted by btarunr
IMO, it was Hector Ruiz that was arrogant. AMD NVIDIA would have gone on to crush ATI and later invest more on CPU R&D to take on Intel. In the end, it didn't end too well for Hector, while Jen-Hsun went on to be CEO of the Year (Forbes), runs a bigger company than AMD, and still good prospects looking into the future.

Click to expand...

Absolutely Not. If it was AMD/NVIDIA, then Intel would have merged with ATI and they would have been a force of reconning IMO. Intel and ATI would have been a competitors nightmare IMO.

When Jen-Hsun does the "come at me bro" gesture he doesn't understand it's a joke. He seriously thinks that's an appropriate reaction for a person to make. I think he still beats Ruiz for raw arrogance.

Click to expand...

Probably. But, CEOs are supposed to be at least a little arrogant, cocky, and confident almost to the point of overconfidence. It's part of the job. You don't get to that kind of position without those qualities.

Absolutely Not. If it was AMD/NVIDIA, then Intel would have merged with ATI and they would have been a force of reconning IMO. Intel and ATI would have been a competitors nightmare IMO.

Click to expand...

You know, that probably would have happened. Interesting possibility.
But, AMD is probably better off with ATI because of that alternate possibility.

Back when AMD did this, Nvidia was the largest (and best imo) supplier of AMD chipsets, and SLI was pretty much an AMD exclusive tech (did anyone actually use the intel nforce's prior to the 6 series)

Actually, now i think about it, pretty much AMD's entire time as the best CPU suppliers (basically not long after the pentium 3's launch until core 2) Nvidia made the best chipsets for them, even for the first few generations of being AMD branded, ATI's competing chipsets were awful.

AMD a failing company? BWAHAHAHA! You couldn't be more wrong. Their stock has gone up from $4.30 ~ November to well over $7.00 now with no end in sight. And there's talks that the new Xbox is going to be powered by an AMD (ATi) GPU.

Not to mention AMD is dominating the APU market.

You sir are very misinformed.

Click to expand...

LOL He is running Intel with Nvidia,He honestly thinks he is the best user..with that stuff.yet AMD is owning in APU market and(for now until Kepler) the GPU market.I think when AMD merged (then took full control)Over ATI was the best merge in the last 10 years.

LOL He is running Intel with Nvidia,He honestly thinks he is the best user..with that stuff.yet AMD is owning in APU market and(for now until Kepler) the GPU market.I think when AMD merged (then took full control)Over ATI was the best merge in the last 10 years.

Click to expand...

Yup Nvidia should of taken the merge deal, since Crossfire was auto supported by Intel from the get go. Now they are lacking in the Glue Logic dept, SLI/CUDA/Physx isnt doin so well like NV intended it to do.

I personally have had nothing but bad experiences with ATI and then AMD gpus so i have no faith in AMD graphic cards the cpus cannot perform to what Intel can. Also Because Nvidia had a multi-gpu idea before AMD/ATI Nvidia in my mind is that makes Nvidia superior. Also I have yet to see an AMD mobile processor, by moblie I mean something to either match or overtake Tegra. So Nvidia FTW!!!

Click to expand...

Say what about multi gpu before AMD/ATI Uhmm Do us a favor look up ATI 128 Rage Fury Maxx

Heck your the only that has said he has had bad...yeah it was YOU not the company or product.....

@Wile E
I beg to differ. There are many examples how customer satisfaction is something obscure and hypothetical. Also the thing called marketing is something even more devious and suspicious. If you studied it or just read about it you should know that it is invented just to sell products to people that don't want them. Advertising is also another tool in this bag of "magics", but I agree that it is needed in some occasions - new company that nobody knows, or completely new product that people should be aware of. But nowhere they teach you to make products that actually people need(please note "need" not "want"). And all the other "deeds" companies do to make you "believe" and walk you to the store. Fanboism was born because of that. That's why I like when companies don't overuse these "magics" and let people think for themselves if they really need or not their products. This commercially driven society we live in is something very strange and I don't like the trend. So that's why I like to think for myself what I "need" not "want". Sure from time to time I oblige to my "urges" of new "toy" but try to keep it "real". This is my opinion and I don't expect you to think likewise, just wanted you to understand my point of view. Like you say "Keep it real bro"